the haircut story is interesting. i think the barber's faith should have no impact on his right to deny service to a person in canada based on gender. in a world of competing rights, sure the make-believe ones should take a back seat to the real ones, no?

the haircut story is interesting. i think the barber's faith should have no impact on his right to deny service to a person in canada based on gender. in a world of competing rights, sure the make-believe ones should take a back seat to the real ones, no?

by and large they are ridiculous. if you can provide a reasoned and evidence-based argument as to why you want to deny rights to someone, you should be able to argue it. but for that to be based on make-believe, which is exactly what faith is, is nonsense, and an affront to rights that actually matter.

by and large they are ridiculous. if you can provide a reasoned and evidence-based argument as to why you want to deny rights to someone, you should be able to argue it. but for that to be based on make-believe, which is exactly what faith is, is nonsense, and an affront to rights that actually matter.

and a right to make me serve you is real? where exactly did that right come from?

Maybe it was someone else on this forum, but I thought you didn't mind libertarianism.

and a right to make me serve you is real? where exactly did that right come from?

Maybe it was someone else on this forum, but I thought you didn't mind libertarianism.

i am most definitely not a libertarian.

if you open a business in canada you do not have the right to discriminate against the people you serve. you can't choose not to serve someone because of something that is protected by the charter. to turn that around and say that anyone is making you serve someone is to completely misunderstand what our charter protections are about. you don't get the right to say no to people based on gender, sexual orientation, race, etc. if you do, you should face a charter challenge.

and to hide behind make-believe as your reason to do so takes away from the person you are discriminating against the right to challenge that discrimination.

in your first sentence in that previous post you are creating a right that does not exist and positing that i am trying to deny you that right. this is simply incorrect.

if you open a business in canada you do not have the right to discriminate against the people you serve. you can't choose not to serve someone because of something that is protected by the charter. to turn that around and say that anyone is making you serve someone is to completely misunderstand what our charter protections are about. you don't get the right to say no to people based on gender, sexual orientation, race, etc. if you do, you should face a charter challenge.

and to hide behind make-believe as your reason to do so takes away from the person you are discriminating against the right to challenge that discrimination.

in your first sentence in that previous post you are creating a right that does not exist and positing that i am trying to deny you that right. this is simply incorrect.

if you open a business in canada you do not have the right to discriminate against the people you serve. you can't choose not to serve someone because of something that is protected by the charter. to turn that around and say that anyone is making you serve someone is to completely misunderstand what our charter protections are about. you don't get the right to say no to people based on gender, sexual orientation, race, etc. if you do, you should face a charter challenge.

and to hide behind make-believe as your reason to do so takes away from the person you are discriminating against the right to challenge that discrimination.

in your first sentence in that previous post you are creating a right that does not exist and positing that i am trying to deny you that right. this is simply incorrect.

This is a private business, so the Charter does not apply. There is no Charter challenge to be made.

Bmats, the "right" originates from the Ontario Human Rights Code, and that's why it is being handled by the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Just an observation. This is petty bullshit that Islamophobes are all over. And the new atheist need to proselytize fits right in alongside that. And still it is incredibly unimportant. The dude is a barber with a particular identity. There is nothing ominous or over zealous about him. And he isn't doing anything as simple as denying services based on gender, or hiding behind make-believe. He's living his life within a realty that includes multiple truths that need to be faced by all of us. But down with Islamic barbers!

Or maybe the guy is just an asshole. In which case make-believe has nothing to do with it, and he can be treated as an asshole. It probably won't make him any less of an asshole. But then he won't be the CEO of Monsanto either.

The older Hitchens would approve. Side with George Bush on bombing the shit out of Baghdad and stand firm with a woman's right to have her hair cut by a Muslim, but she better not cover that hair if she is a Muslim, because that would just be too unenlightened for his tastes. There we go. All our problems solved.

so, if a woman who he wasn't related to was in serious medical jeopardy and needed CPR or needed to be carried out of a dangerous situation.... does he turn away and put his faith first?

i know that is a much more extreme example.... but at the core of this debate is the absurdity of the rules that are being imposed on this man by his muslim faith.... and they are most certainly absurd to me. where do you draw the line?

Just an observation. This is petty bullshit that Islamophobes are all over. And the new atheist need to proselytize fits right in alongside that. And still it is incredibly unimportant. The dude is a barber with a particular identity. There is nothing ominous or over zealous about him. And he isn't doing anything as simple as denying services based on gender, or hiding behind make-believe. He's living his life within a realty that includes multiple truths that need to be faced by all of us. But down with Islamic barbers!

Or maybe the guy is just an asshole. In which case make-believe has nothing to do with it, and he can be treated as an asshole. It probably won't make him any less of an asshole. But then he won't be the CEO of Monsanto either.

The older Hitchens would approve. Side with George Bush on bombing the shit out of Baghdad and stand firm with a woman's right to have her hair cut by a Muslim, but she better not cover that hair if she is a Muslim, because that would just be too unenlightened for his tastes. There we go. All our problems solved.

this is neither simple or petty. the reality of competing rights butting up against one another is an increasing problem in secular societies. i would be wholly and completely uncomfortable with the notion that people's make-believe trumps others reality. to call this prosthelytizing is to deny the reasonable point being made.

'living his life within a reality that includes multiple truths'... i have seen you reference this meaningless drivel too many times. it's about time you explained how this is real, and how this should impinge on a woman's right to get service in her own community. there is bit one truth, and the question is whether or not people can see it. most can't, so we reason through it. one way to make sure you won't see it is to invent your own, or, even worse, to believe in someone else's invention without questioning it.

muslim, catholic, zeus-worshipping, i don't give a flying fuck. none of it is my reality, and none of it has a shred of credibility to support it.

i think augusta is more offensive than this, and i'm completely cool with men/women only organizations/clubs. people just need to let go of caring so much about stuff that really doesn't matter. there's a million barbers that she could get her hair cut from. if she was turned away because of religious faith, she should respectfully go on to the next one. it's not like they called her a dyke and scorned her because of her sexual preferences.

so, if a woman who he wasn't related to was in serious medical jeopardy and needed CPR or needed to be carried out of a dangerous situation.... does he turn away and put his faith first?

i know that is a much more extreme example.... but at the core of this debate is the absurdity of the rules that are being imposed on this man by his muslim faith.... and they are most certainly absurd to me. where do you draw the line?

You're questioning Muslim faith there which is fine but you can't blame the dude for it. He was born into it and brainwashed into it (most likely). Yes there's a shitload wrong with the Muslim religion but that goes for all religions. In this case I think the barber has a point. He was exercising his religious belief not questioning gender equality. I think the woman is just milking it or is highly ignorant of the Muslim religion. Either way, I don't think this'll drag on to court

i think augusta is more offensive than this, and i'm completely cool with men/women only organizations/clubs. people just need to let go of caring so much about stuff that really doesn't matter. there's a million barbers that she could get her hair cut from. if she was turned away because of religious faith, she should respectfully go on to the next one. it's not like they called her a dyke and scorned her because of her sexual preferences.

Well put.

I hate to do this but trane I disagree with you on this. Which is odd as I normally don't. He's not believing in some cult. This is the Muslim faith and if he were to go strictly by the interpretation of it which he believes then hr is in the right.

I hate to do this but trane I disagree with you on this. Which is odd as I normally don't. He's not believing in some cult. This is the Muslim faith and if he were to go strictly by the interpretation of it which he believes then hr is in the right.

not well put at all. the muslim faith is no different from a cult, from the easter bunny, from the flying spaghetti monster, etc. it's all fairy tales, and fairy tales are fine and dandy for personal spirituality, but should have absolutely no influence on what happens in terms of public and social policy in a secular democracy. it's total bullshit.